[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77852-77855]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31752]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-475-818]
Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative
review and determination to revoke the antidumping duty order in part:
Certain pasta from Italy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 77853]]
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2000, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') published the preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Italy. This
review covers the following exporters/producers of subject merchandise:
(1) Commercio-Rappresentanze-Export S.r.l. (``Corex''); (2) F.lli De
Cecco di Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. (``De Cecco''); (3) La Molisana
Industrie Alimentari S.p.A. (``La Molisana''); (4) Pastificio Fratelli
Pagani S.p.A. (``Pagani''); (5) Pastificio Antonio Pallante
(``Pallante''); (6) P.A.M. S.r.l. (``PAM''); and (7) N. Puglisi & F.
Industria Paste Alimentare S.p.A. (``Puglisi''). The period of review
(``POR'') is July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, these final results
differ from the preliminary results. The final results are listed in
the section ``Final Results of Review.'' For our final results, we have
found that during the POR, La Molisana and PAM sold subject merchandise
at less than normal value (``NV''). We have also found that during the
POR, Corex, De Cecco, Pallante, Pagani, and Puglisi did not make sales
of the subject merchandise at less than NV (i.e., ``zero'' or de
minimis dumping margins). In addition, we are revoking the antidumping
order with respect to De Cecco, based on three years of sales in
commercial quantities at not less than NV. See ``Intent to Revoke''
section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 13, 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Terpstra or Geoffrey Craig, AD/
CVD Enforcement, Office VI, Group II, Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3965, or (202) 482-4161,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (``the Act''), are references to the provisions
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are
to 19 CFR Part 351 (1999).
Background
On August 8, 2000, the Department published the preliminary results
of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta
from Italy. See Notice of Preliminary Results and Partial Recission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Intent to Revoke Antidumping
Duty Order in Part: Certain Pasta from Italy, 65 FR 48467 (August 8,
2000) (``Preliminary Results''). The review covers seven manufacturers/
exporters. The POR is July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999. We invited
parties to comment on our preliminary results of review. We received
case briefs on September 7, 2000, from PAM, De Cecco, and La
Molisana.\1\ A public hearing was not held with respect to this
review.\2\ The Department has conducted this administrative review in
accordance with section 751 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On September 28, 2000, we rejected one page of the case
brief submitted by PAM, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2) and 19 CFR
351.302(d), because we found that the page contained untimely new
factual information. PAM resubmitted the page of the case brief
without the new information on October 2, 2000.
\2\ Although on September 7, 2000 PAM requested a hearing, that
request was subsequently withdrawn on September 18, 2000. No other
party requested a hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of Review
Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain non-egg dry
pasta in packages of five pounds (2.27 kilograms) or less, whether or
not enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional
ingredients such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten,
diastasis, vitamins, coloring and flavorings, and up to two percent egg
white. The pasta covered by this scope is typically sold in the retail
market, in fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or polyethylene or
polypropylene bags of varying dimensions.
Excluded from the scope of this review are refrigerated, frozen, or
canned pastas, as well as all forms of egg pasta, with the exception of
non-egg dry pasta containing up to two percent egg white. Also excluded
are imports of organic pasta from Italy that are accompanied by the
appropriate certificate issued by the Instituto Mediterraneo Di
Certificazione, by Bioagricoop Scrl, by QC&I International Services, by
Ecocert Italia or by Consorzio per il Controllo dei Prodotti Biologici.
The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable under
item 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise
subject to the order is dispositive.
Scope Rulings
The Department has issued the following scope rulings to date:
(1) On August 25, 1997, the Department issued a scope ruling that
multicolored pasta, imported in kitchen display bottles of decorative
glass that are sealed with cork or paraffin and bound with raffia, is
excluded from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty
orders. See Memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, dated
August 25, 1997, in the case file in the Central Records Unit, main
Commerce building, room B-099 (``the CRU'').
(2) On July 30, 1998, the Department issued a scope ruling, finding
that multipacks consisting of six one-pound packages of pasta that are
shrink-wrapped into a single package are within the scope of the
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Letter from Susan H.
Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
to Barbara P. Sidari, Vice President, Joseph A. Sidari Company, Inc.,
dated July 30, 1998, which is available in the CRU.
(3) On October 23, 1997, the petitioners filed an application
requesting that the Department initiate an anti-circumvention
investigation of Barilla, an Italian producer and exporter of pasta.
The Department initiated the investigation on December 8, 1997 (62 FR
65673). On October 5, 1998, the Department issued its final
determination that Barilla's importation of pasta in bulk and
subsequent repackaging in the United States into packages of five
pounds or less constitutes circumvention, with respect to the
antidumping duty order on pasta from Italy pursuant to section 781(a)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(b). See Anti-circumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Pasta from Italy: Affirmative Final
Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 63 FR
54672 (October 13, 1998).
(4) On October 26, 1998, the Department self-initiated a scope
inquiry to determine whether a package weighing over five pounds as a
result of allowable industry tolerances is within the scope of the
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. On May 24, 1999 we issued a
final scope ruling finding that, effective October 26, 1998, pasta in
packages weighing or labeled up to (and including) five pounds four
ounces is within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty
orders. See Memorandum from John
[[Page 77854]]
Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, dated May 24, 1999, which is available
in the CRU.
The following scope ruling is pending:
(5) On April 27, 2000, the Department self-initiated an anti-
circumvention inquiry to determine whether Pagani's importation of
pasta in bulk and subsequent repackaging in the United States into
packages of five pounds or less constitutes circumvention, with respect
to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on pasta from Italy
pursuant to section 781(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(b). See
Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Initiation of Anti-circumvention
Inquiry of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 65 FR 26179
(May 5, 2000).
Determination to Revoke
On July 28, 1999, De Cecco submitted a request, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.222, that the Department revoke the antidumping duty order with
respect to its sales of the subject merchandise. In accordance with 19
CFR 351.222(e), this request was accompanied by a certification that De
Cecco had not sold the subject merchandise at less than NV for a period
of three consecutive reviews, which included this review period, and
that it sold the subject merchandise in commercial quantities to the
United States during each of these three years. De Cecco also has
stated that it would not sell the subject merchandise at less than NV
to the United States in the future, and agreed to the reinstatement of
the antidumping order with respect to its merchandise, as long as any
exporter or producer is subject to the order, if the Department
concludes that De Cecco sold the subject merchandise at less than NV.
In our preliminary results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(f),
we stated our intent to revoke in part the order for certain pasta from
Italy as it pertains to De Cecco's sales of the subject merchandise.
See Preliminary Results. No parties submitted comments on De Cecco's
request for revocation.
Therefore, because De Cecco has made sales at not less than NV for
three consecutive reviews in commercial quantities (see Memorandum from
Jarrod Goldfeder to File, ``Shipments of Pasta to the United States by
De Cecco,'' dated July 31, 2000) and because there is no evidence on
the record to indicate the likelihood of resumption of sales at dumped
prices, we are revoking the antidumping duty order in part with respect
to De Cecco's sales of the subject merchandise. See Certain Welded
Stainless Steel Pipe From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Determination To Revoke Order In Part, 65 FR
39367 (June 26, 2000).
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Third Antidumping Duty Administrative Review''
(``Decision Memorandum'') from Holly A. Kuga, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, to Troy H. Cribb, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, dated concurrently with this
notice, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues
which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in the
Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. Parties
can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and
the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is
on file in the CRU, room B-099 (``B-099'') of the main Department
building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
percentage weighted-average margins exist for the period July 1, 1998,
through June 30, 1999:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/exporter Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corex.............................. zero
De Cecco........................... 0.22 (de minimis)
La Molisana........................ 5.26
Pagani............................. 0.49 (de minimis)
Pallante........................... 0.08 (de minimis)
PAM................................ 5.04
Puglisi............................ 0.07 (de minimis)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department shall determine, and Customs shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b), we have calculated exporter/importer-specific
assessment rates by aggregating the dumping margins for all U.S. sales
to each importer and dividing the amount by the total entered value of
the sales to that importer. Where the importer-specific assessment rate
is above de miminis, we will instruct Customs to assess antidumping
duties on that importer's entries of subject merchandise. We will
direct Customs to assess the resulting percentage margins against the
entered Customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that
importer's entries under the order during the POR.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review
for all shipments of certain pasta from Italy entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for
the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above, except where the
margin is de minimis or zero we will instruct Customs not to collect
cash deposits; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies
not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the
original less-than-fair-value (``LTFV'') investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be 11.26 percent, the ``All Others'' rate established in
the LTFV investigation. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and
Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain
Pasta from Italy, 61 FR 38547 (July 24, 1996). These deposit
requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final
results of the next administrative review.
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return/
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
[[Page 77855]]
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 6, 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix--List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum
PAM
Comment 1: Excluding certain sales from the database
Comment 2: Model matching for unenriched pasta
Comment 3: Selection of normal values
Comment 4: Exchange rate conversion
Comment 5: Level of trade methodology
Comment 5A: General level of trade methodology
Comment 5B: Inventory carrying cost
Comment 5C: Freight and delivery
Comment 6: Shape-based methodology
Comment 7: Short-term borrowing rate
Comment 8: Verification
Comment 9: Sampling methodology
Comment 10: Department of Commerce's release of data
Comment 11: Constructed export price language in the margin program
Comment 12: Administrative process
Comment 13: Accuracy of final results
Comment 14: Cost of production and constructed value data
Comment 15: Weight-averaging methodology
Comment 16: Disregarding sales below cost
Comment 17: Misstated cost data
Comment 18: Raw material cost
Comment 19: Home market sales used in below-cost test
Comment 20: Below-cost sales
Comment 21: General and administrative expenses
Comment 22: Financial expense rate
De Cecco
Comment 23: Constructed export price offset and commission offset
Comment 24: U.S. selling expenses
Comment 25: Countervailing duty variable
La Molisana
Comment 26: Treatment of negative net-U.S. prices
Comment 27: Total overall cost of production data for calculation of
cost of production and constructed value
Comment 28: Ministerial Error
[FR Doc. 00-31752 Filed 12-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P